By definition, a fetus does not possess rights because the things in nature that give rise to rights are human individuation and the faculty of volition, which in turn gives rise to moral agency.

A fetus is the diametric opposite of individuated: it lives off of a fully individuated host. For this precise reason, the right belongs exclusively to the host — i.e. the pregnant woman — from whom that fetus derives its life entire. When the fetus is born, it becomes individuated. It’s at this point that rights begin.

There are no such things as fetal rights — just as there are no such things a zygotic rights or cytoplasmic rights or protoplasmic rights or embryonic rights.

On this issue, as on many others, I stand in complete opposition to most so-called libertarians (a meaningless word), many of whom are far to the left and many of whom are far to the right (an illustration of why “libertarian” is a meaningless word — i.e. a rubber word which can be stretched to cover virtually anything).

Here, though, is the primary thing I’d like for someone, right, left, or middle, I don’t care, to explain to me at last:

How does it follow that because the medical procedure of abortion should always be a fully decriminalized, decentralized, entirely legal and lawful practice and because a woman does possess the inalienable right to decide what happens to her own body and does also possess the full and inalienable right to choose abortion or not — as she and she alone determines — how does it follow from this that I or anyone else should therefore be compelled by the government to fund the abortions of others?

Answer: it does not.

It does not follow.

It’s a non-sequitur fallacy writ large.

Non-sequitur directly from Latin means: “Not in sequence.”

Less directly, it means: “It does not follow” — i.e. the conclusion doesn’t follow from the premise.

Here are some other examples of non-sequitur fallacies:

All mammals are warm-blooded.

All whales are mammals.

Therefore: all whales are warm-blooded have blow spouts.

Or:

All human-beings possess rights which are inalienable.

All men are human-beings.

Therefore: all men have the right to free vasectomies.

Or:

Healthcare does not exist in nature apart from the humans who learn to practice it.

All women and men are humans.

Therefore: all women and men have the right to employer-funded facelifts.

Or:

Doctors have the absolute right to practice abortion or not, as they choose.

Women have the absolute right to choose abortion or not, as they choose.

Therefore: all Hobby Lobby employees have the right to employer-funded abortions.

Or:

There are no such things as fetal rights.

Healthcare is not a right but a service provided by those who learn to practice it.

Therefore: state control of the healthcare industry is necessary.

Or:

All women possess the legitimate right to their own bodies.

All legitimate rights are inalienable.

Therefore: all women have the right to car rides to and from each doctor visit.

Or:

Fundamentally, there’s only one right: the right to your own existence.

All legitimate rights are an elaboration on the fundamental right to your own existence.

Therefore: all women have a right to abortions paid for by society as a whole.

No, reader, this most certainly doesn’t follow.

Don’t let anyone convince you that it does.

It is a textbook fallacy of logic called a non-sequitur, which is also known as an invalid inference or an irrelevant reason —  occasionally you’ll still hear it termed derailment: i.e. a sudden shift in the chain of reasoning, almost always used as a rhetorical tactic.

My rights, your rights, everyone’s rights stop where another’s begin.